ML033090170
| ML033090170 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Reed College |
| Issue date: | 12/12/2003 |
| From: | Hughes D NRC/NRR/DRIP/RORP |
| To: | Frantz S Reed College |
| Hughes d.,NRR/DRIP/RNRP, 301-415-1631 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML033090156 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC MC0354 | |
| Download: ML033090170 (9) | |
Text
December 12, 2003 Mr. Stephen G. Frantz, Director Reed Reactor Facility Reed College 3203 SE Woodstock Blvd.
Portland, OR 97202
SUBJECT:
ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO AMENDED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-112 - REED COLLEGE NUCLEAR REACTOR (TAC NO.
Dear Mr. Frantz:
The Commission has issued enclosed Amendment No. 7 to Facility Operating License No. R-112 for the Reed College Nuclear Reactor. The amendment consists of changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) in response to your request of March 11, 2003.
10 CFR Part 50.36 requires that the licensee have TSs that meet the requirements of that section. Section 50.36(c)(2) (ii) contains the requirement for a Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) if one or more of the criterion listed are met. The amendment reflects the requested change to one of the interlocks, a LCO, listed in Table II, Minimum Interlocks, of the TSs. The requested change does not change the functional effectiveness of the LCO and therefore meets the regulation. As part of this amendment the interlock is changed as requested.
A copy of the related Safety Evaluation supporting Amendment No. 7 is also enclosed.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Daniel E. Hughes, Project Manager Research and Test Reactors Section New, Research and Test Reactors Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-288
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 7
- 2. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls.: Please see next page
Reed College Docket No. 50-288 cc:
Mayor of the City of Portland 1220 Southwest 5th Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Reed College ATTN: Dr. Peter Steinberger Dean of Faculty 3203 S.E. Woodstock Boulevard Portland, OR 97202-8199 Reed College ATTN: Dr. Colin Diver, President 3203 S.E. Woodstock Boulevard Portland, OR 97202-8199 Oregon Department of Energy ATTN: David Stewart-Smith, Director Division of Radiation Control 625 Marion Street, N.E.
Salem, OR 97310 Test, Research, and Training Reactor Newsletter University of Florida 202 Nuclear Sciences Center Gainesville, FL 32611
December 12, 2003 Mr. Stephen G. Frantz, Director Reed Reactor Facility Reed College 3203 SE Woodstock Blvd.
Portland, OR 97202
SUBJECT:
ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO AMENDED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-112 - REED COLLEGE NUCLEAR REACTOR (TAC NO.
Dear Mr. Frantz:
The Commission has issued enclosed Amendment No. 7 to Facility Operating License No. R-112 for the Reed College Nuclear Reactor. The amendment consists of changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) in response to your request of March 11, 2003.
10 CFR Part 50.36 requires that the licensee have TSs that meet the requirements of that section. Section 50.36(c)(2) (ii) contains the requirement for a Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) if one or more of the criterion listed are met. The amendment reflects the requested change to one of the interlocks, a LCO, listed in Table II, Minimum Interlocks, of the TSs. The requested change does not change the functional effectiveness of the LCO and therefore meets the regulation. As part of this amendment the interlock is changed as requested.
A copy of the related Safety Evaluation supporting Amendment No. 7 is also enclosed.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Daniel E. Hughes, Project Manager Research and Test Reactors Section New, Research and Test Reactors Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-288
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 7
- 2. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls.:
Please see next page DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC RNRP\\R&TR r/f PDoyle TDragoun MMendonca AAdams PMadden OGC EHylton SHolmes CBassett DMatthews WEresian PIsaac GHill (2) (T5-C3)
ADAMS PACKAGE ACCESSION NO.: ML033090156 ADAMS INCOMING ACCESSION NO.: ML030780774 ADAMS RESPONSE ACCESSION NO.: ML033090170 TEMPLATE No.: NRR-106 OFFICE RNRP:PM RNRP:LA OGC RNRP:SC NAME DHughes:rdr EHylton PMadden DATE 11/ 20 /2003 11/ 05 /2003 12/ 08 /2003 12/ 12 /2003 C = COVER E = COVER & ENCLOSURE N = NO COPY OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
REED COLLEGE REED REACTOR FACILITY DOCKET NO. 50-288 AMENDMENT TO AMENDED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 7 License No. R-112 1.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that A.
The application for an amendment to Amended Facility Operating License No.
R-112 filed by the Reed College, Reed Reactor Facility (RRF) (the licensee) on March 11, 2003, conforms to the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the regulations of the Commission as stated in Chapter I of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR);
B.
The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C.
There is reasonable assurance that (i) the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public and (ii) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the regulations of the Commission; D.
The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; E.
This amendment is issued in accordance with the regulations of the Commission as stated in 10 CFR Part 51, and all applicable requirements have been satisfied; and F.
Prior notice of this amendment was not required by 10 CFR 2.105, and publication of notice for this amendment is not required by 10 CFR 2.106.
2.
Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the enclosure to this license amendment, and paragraph 3.B. of Amended Facility Operating License No. R-112 is hereby amended to read as follows:
3.B.
Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 7, are hereby incorporated in the license. The licensee shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.
3.
This license amendment is effective as of the date of issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/RA by Marvin Mendonca Acting for/
Patrick M. Madden, Section Chief Research and Test Reactors Section New, Research and Test Reactors Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Appendix A Technical Specifications Changes Date of Issuance: December 12, 2003
ENCLOSURE TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 7 AMENDED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-112 DOCKET NO. 50-288 Replace the following page of Appendix A Technical Specifications, with the enclosed page. The revised page is annotated by amendment number and contains a vertical line indicating the area of change.
Remove Insert 7 of 7 7 of 7
(a) reactor operations, including unscheduled shutdowns; (b) principal maintenance activities and the reasons therefore; (c) shipments of radioactive materials; (d) equipment and components surveillance activities; (e) experiments performed with the reactor.
2.
Records to be retained for the life of the facility:
(a) gaseous and liquid radioactive waste released to the environs; (b) off-site environmental monitoring surveys; (c) facility radiation and contamination surveys; (d) fuel inventories and transfers; (e) updated, corrected and as-built facility drawings.
TABLE I MAXIMUM REACTOR SAFETY SYSTEM SCRAMS Originating Channel Set Point
- 1. Linear 110% of full power
- 2. Percent Power 110% of full power
- 3. Scram button on console Manual TABLE II MINIMUM INTERLOCKS Action Prevented
- 1. Control element withdrawal without a neutron induced signal on a reactor l
instrument channel.
l
- 2. Simultaneous manual withdrawal of two control elements.
Page 7 Amendment No. 7
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO AMENDED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-112 THE REED COLLEGE REED REACTOR FACILITY DOCKET NO. 50-288
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated March 11, 2003, the Reed College, (the licensee) submitted a request for amendment to the Technical Specifications (TSs), Appendix A, to Amended Facility Operating License No. R-112 for the Reed Reactor Facility (RRF). The request, when implemented, will be Amendment No. 7 to the TSs:
1.1 TABLE II, MINIMUM INTERLOCKS, Interlock No.1.
The request is to change the Interlock No. 1 such that control element withdrawal is prevented....without a neutron induced signal on a reactor instrument channel. This is a change from the present which states that control element withdrawal is prevented....with less than two induced counts on the startup channel.
2.0 EVALUATION The staff has considered the change listed above. The change is discussed below.
The purpose of Interlock No.1 is to prevent the occurrence of either of these two events:
1.
startup of the reactor with inoperable instrumentation, or 2.
startup of the reactor without an inserted neutron source or sufficient intrinsic neutron source.
It is not safe to bring a reactor critical if the operator has no means to monitor the neutron population (i.e., power) in the core. The instrumentation in question is typically called startup instrumentation because the core neutron population level signal is within the range of this instrument during start up. The neutron population in the core at shutdown is generally too low to be seen by power range instrumentation thereby rendering it unresponsive.
However the ranges of the different level instruments overlap such that the operator can verify the operation of the high level instruments as power increases. If that verification is not made then the operator can safely shut down while still within the range of the startup instrument. It is therefore necessary to ensure proper operation of the low power or startup instrumentation prior to withdrawing control elements.
With many research and test reactors (RTR), of which RRF is one, operation is infrequent and at low enough power such that the intrinsic neutron sources are of very low intensity. In addition, the Keff of the core at shutdown is low enough that the neutron population is unobservable with the low power or startup instrument. This requires that a movable neutron source be placed in the core to ensure, through subcritical multiplication, that there are sufficient neutrons for an observable start up. If the source is placed properly and of high enough intensity, the low power or startup instrument will have a neutron induced signal greater than the instrument noise level. This gives the operator confidence that the source is in place and that the instrument is working properly.
An interlock is used when the consequences are grave enough that the decision to prevent action is taken from the operator and designed into the instrumentation as an action-inaction bistable. It is possible that a startup attempted without instrumentation or observable neutron induced signal or power level could result in the reactor exceeding the licensed power level or a Limiting Safety System Setting (LSSS).
In the case of the RRF, the TRIGA design parameters (large prompt negative temperature coefficient and robust fuel) also help to protect the health and safety of the public by mitigating the consequences of such a scenario. Even so, it is necessary that the TSs for RRF contain this Limiting Condition of Operation (LCO) as required by 10 CFR 50.36(c)(2)(ii)(C). In this case the implementation of the LCO is with Interlock No. 1 of RRF TSs, Table II, Minimum Interlocks.
The licensees original startup instrumentation used a fission chamber detector and indicated neutron population/power level in counts per second. The TS was written to make the calibration of the original startup instrument easy. The TS set point was stated in counts per second. The licensee replaced the startup instrument with one that also used a fission chamber detector but with indication in percent full power. In order to implement the TS the licensee must make a calculation to obtain a percent power level set point that is equivalent to the one stated in the TSs. Since the regulatory requirement for the TS remains, the licensee seeks a change that will retain a functionally equivalent TS while facilitating its implementation. The TS will continue to ensure that a startup can not be attempted without instrumentation that is responsive and indicating neutron signal levels high enough to allow reliable observation of the rate and level of reactor power. The proposed TS is technically acceptable and continues to meet the regulatory requirement.
A similar change was made for another non-power reactor (the Pennsylvania State University, Docket No. 50-05, Amendment No. 32). This change is consistent with the regulations and regulatory guidance and is therefore acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves changes in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The staff has determined that this amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released off site, and no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The staff has concluded, on the basis of the considerations discussed above, that (1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously evaluated, or create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, and does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration; (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by the proposed changes; and (3) such changes are in compliance with the Commissions regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: Daniel E. Hughes Date: December 12, 2003